Deez340

If this had happened to you, you would not be so callas and caviler. I don't have a dog in this fight, but you and everybody else knows this stunk to high heaven! If your at AWA, which I suspect, then by your rational, maybe SkyBus should buy you and that brave chance taker of a Airbus Captain could knock you down a few numbers. After all, like you said "DOH and years of service mean NOTHING."

Packer Backer

Nope, I'm not AWA. But like every other pilot I do have an interest in this merger. The longer the East pilots hold this thing up, the longer they live under their old contract. The longer they live under their old outdated contract, the longer I have to wait to get USAir + 1%. But they would have to come up a long way for me to get a raise. And a SkyBus merger wouldn't affect me under a relative seniority merger.

CactusCrew

I just gotta ask this ... no one on the East side mentions it or brings it up. Not here anyway.

(by the way, I am no longer at Cactus, no dog in the fight anymore ... just old friends at both places) ...

IF USAPA succeeds and tosses ALPA ...

IF USAPA succeeds and tosses the arbitrated seniority list ...

IF USAPA succeeds with a seniority list that places east FOs ahead of west Captains ( DOH, LOS versus relative seniority ) ...

How will USAPA force Parker & company to accept the new list ?



I could be mistaken, but any list that causes displacements and training events can be rejected by the company. That was part of the LOA as I remember when the merger was announced.

Did that expire ? Can USAPA ignore any LOAs previously agreed to by ALPA ?

I doubt it in both cases ... but who knows ?

I just am trying to understand the ultimate goal of USAPA ... It does not seem probable that a binding arbitrated award can be ignored by another union. If that's the case, your company may have the right to ignore the CBA negotiated by the other union (ALPA) when USAPA takes over ...

I do completely understand removing ALPA for other reasons ...

But will it achieve the goal of a new list ?

Later,

now Brown CC

Lindy

At this rate it looks like neither ALPA nor USAPA will be on property.

OBVIOUS to outsiders looking in: when the numbers are not 50% +1 for the vote of either ALPA or USAPA, neither union will be on property. (Correct me if I am wrong, but it isn't the number of pilots voting, but the number of eligible to voters. So, 10% do not vote and have 40% for ALPA and 40% for USAPA = no union)

Listen closely: there is a possibility that the pilots at USAIR (east + west) will NOT have any type of union representation when a vote is completed.

I wonder how that is going to work for all involved.......think pilots are unhappy/miserable now?

To me, that is a bigger issue.

RedeyeAV8r

Lindy

I am not sure that is correct. I believe that as long as 50% +1 vote for some type of union support then a Union will be on Property.

For example:
49% vote for NO union
25% vote for ALPA
20% vote for Independent
6% vote for IBT (Teamsters)

51% voted for some type of Union representation, ALPA has the majority in the above case. So ALPA becomes or remains (in USAir's case) the Bargaining agent. That is how ALPA got on property the first time in 1992 at FedEx.

III Corps

Funny you should assert that because the US/PI merger was based on DOH and not relative position . The maxim was "Date of hire leads to unity and unity leads to DOH." DOH prevailed in the merged list.

If you look through the history of mergers you will think you are in an echo chamber. Same arguments from those that prevail and by those that are hosed. In the end, the only rule that seems to prevail is the Gold Rule and that is 'The one with the Gold rules.' And contrary to the printed position of ALPA national, guys do reap a 'windfall'. To suggest it doesn't happen is ignoring the actual outcome.

As for ALPA, what do they care as long as the dues stream continues.... (note: this is not to disparage the volunteers or those in safety etc but national's agenda seldom seems to be anywhere near that of the line pilot. Fer
'zample, the line pilot wanted guns. ALPA said we don't think so. Line pilots for the most part said AGE 65. ALPA said we don't think so.

Packer Backer

There is so much wrong with this post I don't know where to begin. I guess when I said that DOH and years of service don't matter. I should have added "now" to the end of that sentence. This isn't our daddy's airline anymore. It's a whole new world and the arbitrators have been consistently favoring relative position regardless of DOH.

As for ALPA, they are charged with protecting us as a whole. ALPA isn't a union. It is an association of unions. The MEC is responsible for the individual airline. This USAir divide is hurting us all by keeping our wages and working conditions low.

And ALPA pilots, DID NOT WANT 65!!! The vocal minority won. Duane supported their position on this but Prater came in and didn't follow the majority opinion.

Nobody in this merger reaped any windfall. The East got the top 500 spots and everybody retained their position. Better yet, they got to keep their jobs. All the West pilots got was to keep their current seats. I hate to admit this, but sometimes I wish that USAir would just dissolve the East and have the West take over all of their flying. At least I wouldn't have to hear about all this BS anymore.

A320fumes

Ditto!

Good luck East! I wish we all had the ability to say "enough".

III Corps

I know it is an an association instead of a union so it sends strongly worded letters instead of actually having job actions. But let's step back to one of your earlier comments.

I don't know too many guys who did a risk reward on which airline they went with. Most of the guys I have known over 3+ decades took the first number offered unless there was more than one offer at the same time. So to suggest someone risked their future may be possible but I would have serious doubts about that assertion.

And are you saying that ALPA has protected the US pilot group? How so? It appears that even the big boys were hoodwinked by fast moving management teams which dissolved pensions WITH ALPA's agreement. Pensions were lost, compensation cut dramatically and meanwhile management teams walked off with a butt load of gold.

And I saw different surveys when they were actually taken and ALPA initially took the position of 'it has worked for years' rather than showing any real data on changing position. That is not leadership... that is inertia. AND while all this was going on DUH-wayne and the upper echelon were getting huge raises. And that too is not leadership. Had ALPA bigwigs taken commensurate pay cuts as the line guys, I may have been impressed. It did not happen.

But possibly you can review ALPA's position on not putting guns in the cockpit and then changing their position.

I am not familiar with the top 500 but would wager that everyone of them were on property years before AmWest was ever formed.

As someone else noted, you seem quite cavalier about this whole thing so one could assume, maybe incorrectly, that your career has been uninterrupted by any setbacks or mergers or bankruptcies. Such events tend to leave different viewpoints commensurate with the pain incurred.

I could be wrong.

all4114all

The seniority is not figured out for DAL NWA. You should do more research when posting.

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/0...northwest-nwa/